LPB as a Crack Initiation Resistant Process for Case Hardened Steels

N. Jayaraman, Doug Christensen, Jeremy Scheel

Lambda Research
5521 Fair Lane
Cincinnati, Ohio 45227-3401
Abstract
The high cycle fatigue performance of case carburized 9310 rotorcraft gear steel was
investigated with shot peening (SP), low plasticity burnishing (LPB), and as-ground surface
conditions to compare the relative resistance to crack initiation. A 0.010 in. (0.25 mm) EDM
notch was used to simulate damage frequently encountered in rotorcraft gears such as contact
fretting induced pitting. In the smooth (undamaged) condition LPB leads to a 10% improvement
in fatigue strength over SP and a 20% improvement over the as-ground condition, and in the
presence of simulated damage, to a 100% improvement over SP. Residual stress relaxation
due to both mechanical and thermal exposure was also investigated. Both LPB and SP lead to
similar residual stress relaxation on the surface after a single cycle of mechanical overload.
Below the surface, SP leads to either a complete relaxation of the residual compression or a
transition into residual tension after the overload cycle, while LPB leads to stable compressive
residual stresses. This study paves the way for developing applications of LPB technology for
rotorcraft gear components by appropriate design of LPB tools and implementation of the
designed residual stresses to improve the fatigue performance and damage tolerance.
INTRODUCTION
The high cycle fatigue (HCF) performance of rotorcraft drive train components, such as gears,
shafts, and bearings, has long been improved by the introduction of a shallow surface layer of
compressive residual stress by shot peening 1,2,3 . These components are typically manufactured
from high strength case carburized steels such as 9310 steel. To achieve the desired
dimensional precision, the parts are typically finish ground and SP as a final step to enhance the
fatigue strength. Achieving greater depth and magnitude of compression through heavier or
higher intensity peening may further improve the fatigue performance, yet will produce
unacceptable levels of cold work and surface roughness. It has been shown that the rough
surface finish introduced by peening processes can lead to a serious debit in the fatigue
performance of high strength case carburized steels. 4,5,6 . High levels cold work or plastic
deformation associated with the SP processes lead to relaxation of the beneficial compressive
residual stresses when the parts are exposed to moderately elevated temperatures and
mechanical overload conditions. 7,8,9 LPB processing offers the combined advantages of
controlled depth and magnitude of residual compression, mirror-like smooth finish, and
controlled, very low cold work. LPB costs are comparable to conventional SP processes,
generating a highly favorable cost-benefit ratio.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
Material
9310 steel was acquired in the AMS 6265M condition. A total of 62 HCF specimens with
finished dimensions of 0.375 x 1.25 x 8 in. (9.5 x 31.75 x 203.2 mm) and 10 thermal relaxation
and 3 point bend specimens with finished dimensions of 0.375 x 1.25 x 12 in. (9.5 x 31.75 x

304.8 mm) were machined from the bar stock. All specimens were carburized and heat treated
per Rolls-Royces process specification EPS200 to achieve a surface hardness of 62 Rc and a
depth of carburized layer of 0.05 in. (1.27 mm). Test specimens were subsequently machined
to final dimensions. At least 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) of material was ground from each gage section
to remove the decarburized layer before final processing.
Specimen Processing
LPB process parameters were developed for both specimen types to achieve nominally 0.030
in. (0.76 mm) of compression. Samples were processed on a CNC mill to allow positioning of
the LPB tool in a series of passes along the active gage region. LPB test specimens had an
additional 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) of material removed by grinding after the LPB processing to
correct specimen geometry after the quenching process. All SP was performed per Rolls
Royces process specification EPS12176G. Baseline specimens were left in the as ground
condition after the decarburized layer was ground off.
Residual Stress and Retained Austenite Measurements
X-ray diffraction residual stress measurements were performed using a sin2 technique
employing the diffraction of Cr K-alpha 1 radiation from the (211) planes of the BCC structure of
the 9310 gear steel. The diffraction peak angular positions at each of the psi tilts employed for
measurement were determined from the position of the K-alpha 1 diffraction peak separated
from the superimposed K-alpha doublet assuming a Pearson VII function diffraction peak profile
in the high back-reflection region. The diffracted intensity, peak breadth, and position of the Kalpha 1 diffraction peak were determined by fitting the Pearson VII function peak profile by least
squares regression after correction for the Lorentz polarization and absorption effects and for a
linearly sloping background intensity. 10,11,12,13 Where appropriate, material was removed
electrolytically for subsurface measurement in order to minimize possible alteration of the
subsurface residual stress distribution as a result of material removal. The residual stress
measurements were corrected for both the penetration of the radiation into the subsurface
stress gradient 14 and for stress relaxation caused by layer removal. 15 The volume percent
retained austenite was determined using the direct comparison method of Averbach and Cohen 16
in accordance with ASTM E975 and SAE SP-453.

High Cycle Fatigue Testing

High cycle fatigue tests were performed in 4 point bending under constant amplitude loading. A
photograph of the fatigue test setup is shown in Figure 1.
Fatigue testing was conducted at ambient temperature (~25C) and frequency of 30 Hz at an Rratio of 0.1. Notches of 0.010 in. (0.25 mm) were used to simulate contact (pitting fatigue)
damage. Notching was performed using electrical discharge machining (EDM) Figure 2 shows
the location of the EDM notch on the specimen. Specimens were tested in Baseline (Ground),
SP, and LPB conditions. For each condition, one set of specimens was tested without a notch
(smooth) and one set was tested with a notch. Following fatigue testing, each specimen was
examined optically to identify the location of the fatigue failure initiation.

Figure 1: HCF Test Set Up for Testing a Thick Section Specimen.

Figure 2: Photographs Showing the Location of the 0.1 in. Long x 0.010 in. Deep EDM Notch on
the Top Face of the Specimen. The Notch is Shown on an Untested Specimen on the Left and
on the Fracture Face of a Tested Specimen on the Right.
Stability of Residual Stress
The effect of cyclic loading on the stability of residual stresses in LPB treated specimens was
investigated. This was accomplished by comparing residual stress distributions in LPB treated
specimens both before and after HCF testing was performed.
The effect of mechanical overload on the stability of residual stresses was investigated. To
accomplish this two specimens were prepared by low stress grinding (LSG). One specimen was
shot peened on both surfaces and the second specimen was LPB processed on both surfaces.
The specimens were deformed in 3-point bending to a predetermined maximum plastic strain
level at mid-point, creating a plastic strain gradient as a function of distance from the mid-point.
Therefore, a single specimen could be used to test the effect of tensile (bottom surface) and
compressive (top surface) overload. Surface residual stresses were measured by x-ray
diffraction (XRD) methods as a function of distance along the length of the specimens. Each
sample was displaced a total of 0.8 in. (20.3 mm) at mid-length (center) in the bending fixture.
The maximum plastic deformation at the sample center was approximately 1.3% for the shot
peen sample and approximately 1.4% for the LPB processed sample. The plastic deformation
was of low magnitude for both samples beyond 3 in. (76.2 mm) from the center. XRD residual
stress measurements were made at the surface, in the longitudinal direction, on both the
compressive and tensile applied stress sides. Measurements were made from the center of the
bend out to a distance where the plasticity from bending was at or near zero.
The effect of thermal relaxation on the stability of residual stresses was also investigated. To
accomplish this two specimens were prepared by low stress grinding (LSG). One specimen was
SP on both surfaces and the remaining specimen was LPB treated on both surfaces. The effect

of thermal exposure was studied by exposing each specimen to temperatures ranging from
156C to 192C (312.8 377.6F) for 24 hours in a linear tube furnace. Surface residual
stresses were measured by x-ray diffraction methods as a function of position / temperature
along the length of the specimens after thermal exposure.
Surface Roughness
The surface roughness of the LPB treated thick section specimens after processing was
compared to the Baseline (ground) and SP treated HCF specimens. Surface roughness value,
Ra, was an averaged of 3 passes over 0.150 in. (3.8 mm) transverse to the specimen axis, and
over 0.5 in. (12.7 mm) longitudinal with the specimen.

RESULTS
Residual Stresses
Figure 3 contains a plot of the residual stress distribution for the baseline (ground), SP, and LPB
processed conditions. The baseline condition shows a compressive layer at a nominal stress
level of approximately 75 ksi. In the SP condition, the surface compression of 140 ksi
changes as a function of depth and a maximum compression of 220 ksi is seen at a depth of
approximately 0.002 in. (0.05 mm). The stress then gradually decreases to approximately 50
ksi at depths of 0.010 in. (0.25 mm) and beyond. LPB processed specimens shows a surface
compression of 140 ksi, which gradually increases to approximately 270 ksi at a depth of
0.005 in. (0.13 mm), and further gradually decreases to near zero at a depth of 0.030 in. (.76
mm). The higher magnitude and depth of compression provided by LPB processing when
compared to SP provides greater fatigue strength and helps mitigate the effect of contact
fretting damage fatigue performance. The benefit on fatigue performance that LPB processing
provides is discussed in detail in the experimental results section for HCF testing.
LONGITUDINAL RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION
-3

50

Depth (x 10 mm)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900100011001200

-50

-400

-100

-800

-150

As-Ground
Shot Peened
LPB

-200
-250
-300

-1200
-1600

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)

-2000
0

10

20
30
-3
Depth (x 10 in.)

40

50

Figure 3: Plot of Residual Stress vs. Depth in the As-Ground, Shot Peened and LPB Treated
Carburized and Heat Treated 9310 Gear Steel Specimens.

Retained Austenite
The mean volume percent retained austenite is presented in Figure 4. The surface austenite
content is approximately 17%, which remains the same as a function of depth for the baseline
specimen. For the SP specimen the retained austenite reduces to approximately 9% at a depth of
0.001 in. (0.03 mm) and then gradually increases to approximately 15% at depths beyond 0.005 in.
(0.13 mm). In the LPB treated specimen the retained austenite decreases to approximately 8% to a
depth of 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) and then gradually increases to approximately 12% at depths beyond
0.020 in. (0.51 mm). The implications on fatigue performance due to a change in volume percent
austenite where not studied in this investigation.

Volume % Retained Austenite

30
9310 Carburized and Heat Treated
Retained Austenite Vs Depth

20

10
Baseline
SP
LPB

0
0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Depth, in.

Figure 4: Plot of % Retained Austenite vs Depth for Baseline, Shot Peened and LPB Treated
Specimens.

High Cycle Fatigue

Fatigue testing results are presented graphically in Figure 5 as S-N plots. The data are shown in
a semi-log plot of maximum stress in units of ksi (103 psi) and MPa vs. cycles to failure. The
arrows indicate a run-out condition (107 cycles).
The baseline (ground) specimens demonstrated a nominal fatigue strength (Smax for R = 0.1 and
107 cycles) of 200 ksi, this dropped to approximately 60 ksi with the introduction of the EDM
notch, indicating a fatigue debit of > 3. The SP specimens showed a slightly better fatigue
strength of approximately 220 ksi in the smooth condition and approximately 100 ksi with an
EDM notch, indicating a fatigue debit of approximately 2. The LPB treated specimens
demonstrated a fatigue strength of approximately 240 ksi in the smooth condition and
approximately 170 ksi with the notch, indicating a fatigue debit of approximately 1.4.

HIGH CYCLE FATIGUE DATA

9310 Case Carburized/Hardened Steel Thick Section Samples
R = 0.1, 4-point Bending, 30 Hz, RT
Lambda Research
1524-15265

Arrows Indicate Run-Out

Test Terminated
a

1500

250

a,b

a
a

200

1200
150
900
100

600
300

0.010 in.
EDM Notched

Smooth

Baseline
Shot Peened
LPB

0
3
10

10

Notes:
a - Crack initiated from a corner
b - Subsurface initiation
5

10

50

MAXIMUM STRESS (ksi)

MAXIMUM STRESS (MPa)

1800

10

10

CYCLES TO FAILURE

Figure 5: Fatigue Test Results

4-Point Bend Fatigue Test - 9310 Carburized and Hardened Steel
7
(Smax at 10 Cycles for R = 0.1)

Baseline

Shot Peened

LPB Treated

150

Smax @ 10 Cycles, ksi

0.010 in., EDM Notched

25

Smooth

50

200

Smooth

75

Smooth

0.010 in., EDM Notched

100

0.010 in., EDM Notched

250

Smax @ 10 Cycles,
(% of Baseline Smooth Condition)

125

100
50
0

Figure 6: HCF Performance of Untreated, Shot Peened, and LPB Treated Posts With and
Without a 0.010 in. Deep EDM Notch to Simulate Contact (Pitting) Damage on the Gear Tooth.
HCF test results are also presented graphically in the form of a bar chart in Figure 6. The fatigue
strength of the baseline smooth parts is defined to be 100%. As shown here, the baseline
specimens with the EDM notch condition have a fatigue strength loss of over 70% of that of the
baseline smooth condition. Similarly, while the SP smooth condition shows a 10% improvement
over the baseline smooth, the introduction of an EDM notch still leads to over 50% reduction in
fatigue strength. LPB treated smooth specimens showed a 20% improvement over the baseline
smooth condition and a 10% improvement over the shot peened smooth condition. With the
introduction of an EDM notch the fatigue strength dropped only by approximately 15%
compared to the baseline smooth condition.

The increase in fatigue performance that LPB processing provides can lower maintenance cost
for drive train components. This would be achieved by lengthening the time interval between
inspections. LPB processing can provide a higher allowable load on gear teeth for a given
dimensional or weight requirement.
Following fatigue testing, each specimen was examined optically to identify the location of the
fatigue origins. Shown below in Figure 7 are typical fracture surfaces of baseline (9a), SP (9b),
LPB processed (9c), and notched specimens (9d). All notched specimens failures initiated from
the notch so only one process condition is shown, LPB processed.

(a) Baseline 215 ksi, 199,432 cycles

(c) LPB processed 245 ksi, 129,406 cycles

(b) Shot Peened 230 ksi, 89,243 cycles

(d) LPB + Notch 170 ksi, 76,765 cycles

Figure 7: Typical fracture faces from HCF test specimens

Stability of Residual Stress

Mechanical Cyclic Relaxation
Figure 8 shows the residual stress distributions in an LPB treated and surface ground specimen
in both the untested and fatigue tested condition. As seen here, there is little or no relaxation of
residual stresses after mechanical cyclic loading at an Smax of 245 ksi. This shows that during
operation the residual compressive stress induced by the LPB process will not relax due to
elastic cyclic loading.

LONGITUDINAL RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION

-3

50

Depth (x 10 mm)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900100011001200

-50

-400

-100

-800

-150

LPB + Ground
LPB + Ground
+ Fatigue Tested
Smax = 245 ksi
Nf = 129,406 Cycles

-200
-250
-300

-1200
-1600

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)

-2000
0

10

20
30
-3
Depth (x 10 in.)

40

50

Figure 8: Residual Stresses in LPB Treated Specimens Before and After Fatigue Testing.
Mechanical Overload Relaxation
A comparison of surface residual stresses between the LPB treated and SP samples are shown
in Figure 9a. A corresponding residual stress distribution at a depth of 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) for
both LPB treated and SP samples are shown in Figure 9b. Results are shown on a semilogarithmic plot in these figures to expand the scale at the relatively low plastic strain levels.
As shown in Figure 9a, on the surface, both LPB and SP resulted in similar residual stress
distributions. Similar variations in residual stresses after plastic deformation were observed for
the two surface treatments on both the tensile and compressive sides. For both treatments, the
residual stresses were not seen to relax for plastic deformation up to approximately 0.4% and
some relaxation of residual stresses were observed for plastic strain above 0.4%. The tensile
overload appears to result in greater relaxation of residual stresses compared to the
compressive overload.
500

50

Lambda Technologies
1524-15265
April 14, 2010

-50
-500
-100
-1000

-150
-200
-250

-1500
Shot Peened (
LPB Processed (

Tensile Side
Tensile Side

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)

Compressive Side)
Compressive Side)

-2000

-300
0.01

0.1
Percent Strain (%)

Figure 9a: Comparison of Surface Residual Stress as a Function of Bulk Plastic Deformation in
Carburized and Heat Treated 9310 Gear Steel 3-Point Bend Beams.

At a depth of 0.005 in. (0.13 mm), the LPB processed specimen showed a higher magnitude of
compression, (250 to 280 ksi), while the SP specimen showed a lower magnitude of
compression (110 to 150 ksi). Although both specimens showed relaxation of residual
stresses at plastic deformation greater than 0.4%, due to the initial high magnitude of
compression for the LPB processed specimen, it retained a substantial amount of compressive
residual stresses, even at plastic strain levels greater than 1%. In contrast, the SP specimen
showed nearly complete stress relaxation and even transition of the residual stresses from
compression to tension at high plastic strain.
500
50

Lambda Technologies
1524-15265
April 14, 2010

-50

Shot Peened (
LPB Processed (

Tensile Side
Tensile Side

Compressive Side)
Compressive Side)

-500
-100
-1000

-150
-200

-1500

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)

-250
-2000

-300
0.01

0.1
Percent Strain (%)

Figure 9b: Comparison of Residual Stress as a Function of Bulk Plastic Deformation at a Depth
of 0.005 in. in Carburized and Heat Treated 9310 Gear Steel 3-Point Bend Beams.
Thermal Relaxation
The results shown in Figure 10 show the effect of thermal exposure on the relaxation of surface
residual stresses from SP and LPB processing. Residual stress measurements were made on
the thermally exposed surfaces and at a depth of 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) in both SP and LPB
treated specimens.
50

-50

Surface (LPB)
Surface (Shot Peen)

0.005 in. (LPB)

0.005 in. (Shot Peen)

-500
-100
-1000

-150
-200

-1500

Residual Stress (MPa)

Residual Stress (ksi)

-250
Lambda Technologies
1524-15265
April 7, 2010

-300
150

160

170
180
Temperature (C)

190

-2000
200

Figure 10: Comparison of Shot Peened and LPBed Residual Stress for 9310 Steel Carburized
Steel Exposed at Temperatures of 156C to 192C C for 24 Hrs.

As seen in this figure, very little relaxation of residual stresses result from thermal exposure for
both the shot peened and the LPB treated specimens. As observed before, the near surface
compression for both surface treatments are similar, while at the 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) depth, the
LPB treated specimens show higher magnitude of compression. This is a result of the depth of
compression introduced by LPB.
Surface Roughness
The results of the surface roughness measurements for each process are shown in Figure 11 in
the form of a bar chart. The surface roughness is lowest for the LPB process, indicating a
smoother surface as compared to the ground or shot peened surfaces. Smother surfaces lead
to less friction between gear teeth and ultimately greater contact fatigue life. Lower friction also
reduces noise and oil / material temperature.
9310 Carburized and Hardened Gear Steel
Ra Surface Roughness

30

20

Transverse

LPB

Shot Peened

Baseline

LPB

10

Shot Peened

15
Baseline

Surface Roughness, (in.)

25

Longitudinal

Figure 11: Bar Chart Showing the Comparison of the Surface Roughness of Baseline (Ground)
and Shot Peened Specimens versus LPB Treated Specimens.
CONCLUSIONS
A comprehensive study was undertaken to demonstrate the benefits of using LPB technology to
introduce controlled distribution of compressive residual stresses to improve fatigue
performance and damage tolerance in carburized and heat treated 9310 gear steels used in
rotorcraft gears. The following conclusions may be reached from this study:

LPB processing produces compressive residual stresses for depths up to 3X greater

than SP. The peak compressive residual stress for LPB is 20% greater than for SP.
In smooth condition, LPB leads to a 10% improvement in fatigue strength over SP.
With the presence of a 0.010 in. (0.25 mm) deep EDM notch, LPB leads to nearly a
100% improvement in fatigue strength over SP.
The compressive residual stresses from LPB are stable and did not show significant
relaxation after cyclic loading.
Both LPB and SP treatments show similar surface residual stress relaxation after a
single cycle of mechanical overload. However, at a depth of 0.005 in. (0.13 mm) SP
leads to either a complete relaxation or even flipping into tension after the overload
cycle, while the compressive residual stresses are maintained for LPB.
There is very little relaxation of the residual stresses observed for either treatment due to
thermal exposure for 24 hours in the temperature range of 150-200C.

LPB produces a much smoother surface, with a surface roughness of 5 10 in, while
the SP leads to a relatively rough surface with 25 in of Ra surface roughness.

In summary, the LPB treatment has been demonstrated to have improved the fatigue
performance over the standard shot peening treatment in carburized and heat treated 9310 gear
steels, and improve the resistance to simulated contact pitting damage. This demonstration
paves the way for developing applications of this technology for actual gears by appropriate
design of LPB tools and implementation of the designed residual stresses to improve the
performance of rotorcraft gears.
Acknowledgment
Funding from the Army SBIR program Topic No. A09-014, Contract No. W911W6-10-C-0005
(TPOC: Clay Ames, AATD) is gratefully acknowledged. The authors also wish to thank Steve
Hammond for the assistance provided by Rolls Royce, Indianapolis with the carburizing and
heat treatment of specimens, and for technical discussions.
Reference:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

John S. Eckerseley, Editor, Review of Shot Peening Technology Gearing Up for Higher Loads, Metal
Improvement Company, Document # 93099, Spring 1993
Katsumi Inoue, Masana Kato, Estimation of Fatigue Strength Enhancement for Carburized and Shot-Peened
Gears, Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 10, No.3, May-June 1994, pp 362-368
Dennis P. Townsend, Improvements in Surface Fatigue Life of Hardened Gears by High Intensity Shot Peening,
NASA Technical Memorandum 105678, DTIC Publication dated June 17, 1992
Dale W. Schwach, Y.B. Gao, A Fundamental Study on the Impact of Surface Integrity by Hard Turning on
Rolling Contact Fatigue, Transaction of NAMRI/SME Vol. 33, 2005 pp 541-548
Lane Winkelmann, Gear Isotropic Finish Generation General Process Control and Alternate Tooth by Tooth
Process For Large Gears, 2006 CTMA Symposium, Williamsburg, VA March 27-29, 2006
Robert P. Garibay, Nam S. Chang, Improved Fatigue Life of a Carburized Gear By Shot Peening Parameter
Optimization
Prevy, P.S., Cammett J.T., "The Effect of Shot Peening Coverage on Residual Stress, Cold Work and Fatigue
in a Ni-Cr-Mo Low Alloy Steel" Proc. International Conference on Shot Peening, 2002.

Hanagarth, H., Vhringer, O., and Macherauch, E., Shot Peening, Jap. Soc. of Prec. Engrg., Tokyo,
Japan, 337-345 (1993)
Vhringer, O., Residual Stresses, DGM Informationsgasellschaft-Verlag, Oberursel, 47-80 (1986)
Hilley, M.E. ed., (1971), Residual Stress Measurement by X-Ray Diffraction, SAE J784a, Warrendale, PA:
Society of Auto. Eng.)
Noyan, I.C. and Cohen, J.B., (1987) Residual Stress Measurement by Diffraction and Interpretation, (New York,
NY: Springer-Verlag).
Cullity, B.D., (1978) Elements of X-ray Diffraction, 2nd ed., (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley), pp.447-476.
Prevy, P.S., (1986), X-Ray Diffraction Residual Stress Techniques, Metals Handbook, 10, (Metals Park, OH:
ASM), pp 380-392.
Koistinen, D.P. and Marburger, R.E., (1964), Transactions of the ASM, 67.
Moore, M.G. and Evans, W.P., (1958) Mathematical Correction for Stress in Removed Layers in X-Ray
Diffraction Residual Stress Analysis, SAE Transactions, 66, pp. 340-345.
B.L. Averbach and M. Cohen, Trans. AIME, Vol. 176, 1948, p. 401.